Isn't this essentially trying to tax them out of existence? If they all become NFA, isn't there like a $200 fee for each gun? I would have to get rid of 1/2 my collection, there's no way I could afford to pay $200 for each gun that falls in there. I don't want to even think of the bill for the bigger collectors...

Lets not forget that local PDs will be flooded with people trying to get proof of eligibility to own from them. I noticed that the bill does not provide for funds for them...

Although congress has an apparently unlimited power to tax I don't think in necessarily has that same unlimited power concerning arms. Also and correct me if I'm wrong but isn't congresses ability to tax predicated about trade across state borders? I'm not sure how the weapons I currently own would or could constitute trade since I have no intention of selling them...

__________________
""I would say that we have to make up criteria."
OK, which is better for 2 Bantu, 5 Hottentots, and 3 pygmies playing a war march on a calliope at 3 a.m. during a monsoon?
Show your work and round to the nearest decimal."-Mike Irwin

This seems to give the anti-gun folks tons of room to "settle for less" then they ask for by over reaching so much...I just hope and pray that we all stick together as firearm owners and ensure this legislation is totally defeated.

Interesting note though that Feinstein wants to mess with the NFA, and such, an enterprising senator could introduce a poison pill in many ways, because as NFA stands now, the typical AR-15 could not be a part of NFA, unless it was either SBR'd, suppressed, or converted to full auto. I wonder which Feinstein would prefer?

I don't know, I think the part about making currently-owned guns into NFA items is pretty overreaching. As a matter of fact, that particular part may prove to be the poison pill as it will likely lose her the support of people who wouldn't otherwise oppose an AWB because they already own what they want or are hoping to turn profits once it's passed. Likewise, placing such onerous restrictions on firearms that are already legally owned may not sit well with the courts.

Agreed.

I read along with the summary and at first most of it looked like more of the 1994 AWB. Just adding things and changing some rules. But saying that all the semi-autos currently owned have to be registered? The owner has to be fingerprinted? And they can't ever be transferred? That sort of thing will never pass.

But... as was pointed out by others... we have to expect the Left is creating a bargaining position. You start out with more than you can actually expect to pass, that gives you room to "bargain." Drop a few things here and there and then graciously accept "only" getting a reinstatement of the AWB with additional restrictions.

I'm going to keep joining every pro-gun group I can find. The NRA, GOA, and SAF are going to end up doubling or tripling in size before this is done!!

I think any rifle designed more than fifty years ago should qualify as an antique. But I do not understand the whole "hunting or sporting purposes thing0".

Quote:

Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
Background check of owner and any transferee;
Type and serial number of the firearm;
Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration

Somehow I don't think that is going to work. I don't believe that tens of millions of people are going to run out and register their guns, provide photo ID fingerprints and whatnot. That must be how they are planning on getting rid of the guns by making them "illegal".

I wonder what people who think they are having their rights violated and they are being pushed around will do?

__________________Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday.

They probably didn't mean 900 models of guns exempted.. they meant 900 guns period allowed.... Imagine a $200 tax on every firearm you own...

I know that's not what they really said but still, talk about a gun grab! The tax part however is very real as is the fingerprinting and photographing... Hey what happened to innocent until proven guilty..

This is an excerpt out of Sen. Feinsteins new proposed legislation. All of it is Crap! This is just one of the sections that is as close to what Hitler did in Germany.

Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
o Background check of owner and any transferee;
o Type and serial number of the firearm;
o Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
o Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
o Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration.

Well, talk about a list for confiscation! Dedicated funding...BS, they will do nothing but charge each of us to implement this trash legislation.

__________________
To own firearms is to affirm that freedom and liberty are not gifts from the state.
Winchesters Forever (Levers and Pumps 73s, 90s, 92s, 06s, 61s and 63s)

The way I saw it was the flash suppressor and bay lug do not count for the evil features.

But it is the monetary fee to register your guns which you already paid for and purchased legally the part I do not like (and the second background check).

And still no clarification on the 120 on the naughty list.

And the bullet button does not count as a get around and is treated as if not there (even though I think that is only a CA thing).

__________________
""I would say that we have to make up criteria."
OK, which is better for 2 Bantu, 5 Hottentots, and 3 pygmies playing a war march on a calliope at 3 a.m. during a monsoon?
Show your work and round to the nearest decimal."-Mike Irwin

pistols with 10 round fixed mags? Wow i'd love to see what we'd have to come up with for that one? Bringing back some old school stuff.

I'll refrain from posting the rest of my opinions...

__________________E-Shock rounds are engineered to expend maximum energy into soft targets, turning the density mass into an expanding rotational cone of NyTrilium matrix particles, causing neurological collapse to the central nervous system.- Yeah I can do that.
I guarantee you will know it if a bicyclist hits your house going 1000 mph.

Some are afraid of not being armed and a lot of people are afraid of armed criminals, some think we'd be safer with no guns. Okay, here is an idea.

We have national gun licenses, shall issue on completion of a class and background check. That would let you own all non-semi auto firearms. Then if you take a longer safety, proficiency, mental health class/interview you can be issued an M4, but no other full autos, and also own any semi-autos you want, with up to a 30 round magazine, no big 100 rounders any more. Then they could have classes where like say a three man team could get a surplus M60 and other programs like that.

CCW will also be that national license/permit, but you have to go through an intensive class and be qualified to a minimum level of proficiency and knowledge of self defense laws.

The penalties for committing a crime with a gun, stealing a gun, black marketing, etc will be harsh, but not draconian. Just bad enough to make most sane people think twice.

That way all the legal guns will be accounted for, all of them will be secure, unless they are being carried, all the legal carriers will be vetted, we'll have a great national force of non-felons armed with M4s.

Or, we could not do anything, save billions and focus on something actually helpful.

NAF is not a tax. It's a registration fee. Just like the USE tax the Washington State Govt. tries to screw me over with isn't a sales tax. They can call it whatever they want, if they call it the right thing, then it's "ok"

Actually, the NFA "fee" is a TAX and intentionally so... The "act" was passed to thwart the gangsters from using machine guns and other such arms in crime...

if caught with one that didn't have a "tax stamp" assigned than you faced something they knew they could win in court with... and federal at that... The only crime many gangsters were charged with and lost in court... TAX EVASION...

I agree with others who feel that Feinstein's bill has been drawn very broadly to provide portions to bargain away for the main thrust, AWB, restricted magazine capacity and an end to the so-called "gun show" loophole ... I also agree that it's almost impossible to imagine what would be involved in the registration portion ... I'm also hoping that we can count on the House to provide a roadblock to this miserable excuse for a law ... however ... I don't think we'd be wise to discount the national emotion over this issue in the wake of Newtown .. the real problem, in my eyes, is the certainty that another mass shooting will happen again, and soon ... some psycho copycat is probably plotting one even now ... if that happens even the staunchest NRA supporter in Congress will lose their backbone when they're deluged with calls from the home front telling them they have to vote for a Feinstein-type law or start looking for an honest job ... we have a very bumpy road ahead; I'm stocking up on ammo now and looking at a few nice revolvers and a lever action carbine ... we have to realize that the 2A is under serious attack and may not survive as we have known it, especially if Obama gets to name a Scotus justice or two ...

__________________
"If all guns were built with mechanisms that kept them from firing when held sideways, we could end gang violence." humorist Frank Fleming

Isn't this essentially trying to tax them out of existence? If they all become NFA, isn't there like a $200 fee for each gun? I would have to get rid of 1/2 my collection, there's no way I could afford to pay $200 for each gun that falls in there. I don't want to even think of the bill for the bigger collectors...

Ah, but that was always the point of the NFA. I suspect that even in the midst of the Great Depression and New Deal, the drafters of the NFA knew that they'd be on shaky Constitutional ground with an outright ban, so instead they chose to regulate so heavily as to create a de facto ban. As bad as $200 per gun sounds in today's dollars, it would have been a small fortune in 1934 dollars (the amount has not changed). Adjusted for inflation, $200 in 1934 would be roughly equivalent to $3,300 in 2011.

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.